Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

vamedic03 wrote:Unless you want to do M&A, there are plenty of other firms that do more prestigious work. Yes, WLRK pays high bonuses (a product of deal work), but they are very, very good at one thing (M&A). If you want to litigate, there are better firms; if you want to do Tax, there are better firms; if you want to do regulatory work, there are better firms; and if you want to do a general corporate practice, there are better firms.

Point being - unless you want to do M&A, you should probably be looking at other firms.

I'm a 0L. In doing research about a career in M&A law, I was led to WLRK more or less by their prestige in M&A. I'm also interested in general corporate practice -- what are those "better" firms? Please advise on some. Thanks!

The last I want to do is to become a litigator. Too much speaking.

Don't let that bother you. Law firm lawyers almost never see the courtroom--particularly associates. The main thing you'll be seeing is your desk and the rest of the firm's office. From what I've been told by people at firms/people who've worked at them you basically pump out a ton of memos and do a lot of doc review.

Someone earlier adduced that unless you're HYS or so and anything before that if you're not Gandhi in law school then Watchell doesn't recruit you. I don't know why then do they have people even from NYLS in their firm?

RevolverX wrote:Someone earlier adduced that unless you're HYS or so and anything before that if you're not Gandhi in law school then Watchell doesn't recruit you. I don't know why then do they have people even from NYLS in their firm?

RevolverX wrote:Someone earlier adduced that unless you're HYS or so and anything before that if you're not Gandhi in law school then Watchell doesn't recruit you. I don't know why then do they have people even from NYLS in their firm?

Seriously, there are top 1/3-top half people from HYS who get Wachtell offers in a given year. There are also people who turn down Wachtell offers for "lesser" firms.

It's not some holy grail for top 10%-ers from HYSCCNP. Their selectivity is magnified only to the degree to which their bonuses make a 2L's package quiver.

RevolverX wrote:Someone earlier adduced that unless you're HYS or so and anything before that if you're not Gandhi in law school then Watchell doesn't recruit you. I don't know why then do they have people even from NYLS in their firm?

Seriously, there are top 1/3-top half people from HYS who get Wachtell offers in a given year. There are also people who turn down Wachtell offers for "lesser" firms.

It's not some holy grail for top 10%-ers from HYSCCNP. Their selectivity is magnified only to the degree to which their bonuses make a 2L's package quiver.

Truf. I'd never work for WLRK (even if I had the #s), the work they do seem boring as fuck - might as well just go into banking.

RevolverX wrote:Someone earlier adduced that unless you're HYS or so and anything before that if you're not Gandhi in law school then Watchell doesn't recruit you. I don't know why then do they have people even from NYLS in their firm?

Seriously, there are top 1/3-top half people from HYS who get Wachtell offers in a given year. There are also people who turn down Wachtell offers for "lesser" firms.

It's not some holy grail for top 10%-ers from HYSCCNP. Their selectivity is magnified only to the degree to which their bonuses make a 2L's package quiver.

Truf. I'd never work for WLRK (even if I had the #s), the work they do seem boring as fuck - might as well just go into banking.

M&A is probably among the most interesting legal work you can do, but keep telling yourself that. It's a lot easier to speculate on what you would do than to actually be in the position to choose.

edit: And, frankly, the people that get into WLRK have their pick of basically any other corporate firm in the world. If M&A was at all boring, these geniuses wouldn't be doing it.

Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed May 18, 2011 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User wrote:M&A is probably among the most interesting legal work you can do, but keep telling yourself that. It's a lot easier to speculate on what you would do than to actually be in the position to choose.

Can you choose during OCI or summer associateship the department in which you want to work?

RevolverX wrote:Someone earlier adduced that unless you're HYS or so and anything before that if you're not Gandhi in law school then Watchell doesn't recruit you. I don't know why then do they have people even from NYLS in their firm?

Seriously, there are top 1/3-top half people from HYS who get Wachtell offers in a given year. There are also people who turn down Wachtell offers for "lesser" firms.

It's not some holy grail for top 10%-ers from HYSCCNP. Their selectivity is magnified only to the degree to which their bonuses make a 2L's package quiver.

Truf. I'd never work for WLRK (even if I had the #s), the work they do seem boring as fuck - might as well just go into banking.

M&A is probably among the most interesting legal work you can do, but keep telling yourself that. It's a lot easier to speculate on what you would do than to actually be in the position to choose.

edit: And, frankly, the people that get into WLRK have their pick of basically any other corporate firm in the world. If M&A was at all boring, these geniuses wouldn't be doing it.

*Fails to understand that boring and interesting are completely relative terms*

Never underestimate the willingness of geniuses to do boring things for money (though I'm sure many of them enjoy their work)

Personally, I want to be a lawyer because I want to work on "lawyerly" things, like ummm, IDK, cases? Is that really so difficult to grasp?

Veyron wrote:Truf. I'd never work for WLRK (even if I had the #s), the work they do seem boring as fuck - might as well just go into banking.

M&A is probably among the most interesting legal work you can do, but keep telling yourself that. It's a lot easier to speculate on what you would do than to actually be in the position to choose.

edit: And, frankly, the people that get into WLRK have their pick of basically any other corporate firm in the world. If M&A was at all boring, these geniuses wouldn't be doing it.

*Fails to understand that boring and interesting are completely relative terms*

Never underestimate the willingness of geniuses to do boring things for money (though I'm sure many of them enjoy their work)

Personally, I want to be a lawyer because I want to work on "lawyerly" things, like ummm, IDK, cases? Is that really so difficult to grasp?

I'm not the anonymous person who wrote that, but I do agree with him. Just like you, I thought it'd be boring as hell, but Wachtell specializes in (or rather, pioneered in the 1980s through Marty Lipton) a very specific type of target-side M&A takeover expertise. Even if it sounds dull now, when you take Corporations those cases (including the recent developments, like Airgas) involve some of the most interesting developing legal issues around. Keep an open mind until you take the course - I can almost guarantee you it'll be the most interesting topic all semester.

Veyron wrote:Truf. I'd never work for WLRK (even if I had the #s), the work they do seem boring as fuck - might as well just go into banking.

M&A is probably among the most interesting legal work you can do, but keep telling yourself that. It's a lot easier to speculate on what you would do than to actually be in the position to choose.

edit: And, frankly, the people that get into WLRK have their pick of basically any other corporate firm in the world. If M&A was at all boring, these geniuses wouldn't be doing it.

*Fails to understand that boring and interesting are completely relative terms*

Never underestimate the willingness of geniuses to do boring things for money (though I'm sure many of them enjoy their work)

Personally, I want to be a lawyer because I want to work on "lawyerly" things, like ummm, IDK, cases? Is that really so difficult to grasp?

I'm not the anonymous person who wrote that, but I do agree with him. Just like you, I thought it'd be boring as hell, but Wachtell specializes in (or rather, pioneered in the 1980s through Marty Lipton) a very specific type of target-side M&A takeover expertise. Even if it sounds dull now, when you take Corporations those cases (including the recent developments, like Airgas) involve some of the most interesting developing legal issues around. Keep an open mind until you take the course - I can almost guarantee you it'll be the most interesting topic all semester.

Veyron wrote:*Fails to understand that boring and interesting are completely relative terms*

Never underestimate the willingness of geniuses to do boring things for money (though I'm sure many of them enjoy their work)

Personally, I want to be a lawyer because I want to work on "lawyerly" things, like ummm, IDK, cases? Is that really so difficult to grasp?

I'm not the anonymous person who wrote that, but I do agree with him. Just like you, I thought it'd be boring as hell, but Wachtell specializes in (or rather, pioneered in the 1980s through Marty Lipton) a very specific type of target-side M&A takeover expertise. Even if it sounds dull now, when you take Corporations those cases (including the recent developments, like Airgas) involve some of the most interesting developing legal issues around. Keep an open mind until you take the course - I can almost guarantee you it'll be the most interesting topic all semester.

Oh don't get me wrong - this is litigation, too. Wachtell structures their takeover defense so that it's defensible in court, but it also represents them in court to argue these defenses. M&A takeover defenses are transactionally implemented, but they're driven by and in response to the underlying Delaware (i.e., corporate) case law that continues to develop. For an example of some of the issues/considerations in these cases, http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/who-won-in-the-airgas-poison-pill-case/ might be an interesting read. In any event, glad to hear you're staying open to it.

Kimchi_smile wrote:The last I want to do is to become a litigator. Too much speaking.

I love 0Ls.

Sorry if I sound really dumb. Litigators go to court right? They...litigate? Why do you love 0Ls because I said too much speaking?

Assuming you're in the litigation department of a Biglaw firm, you won't be actually speaking in court for a number of years. Of course this doesn't apply if you get a job with a trial practice (which you wouldn't want for the reason above).